Animalman294 Posted April 11, 2005 Report Share Posted April 11, 2005 I want to get a set of 68 mm cubs, but I do a lot more trail and sand riding than I do racing. I don't want to have problems with the motor because it is designed to flat out run. I want the power when I do race, but I do not want to give up my trail and sand hill carving because of the motor being designed to race only. I read that these are also not bottlom end cylinder's, does that mean they are the same as stock or are they worse. If you have any info that may help - thanks in advance.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigboybanshee Posted April 11, 2005 Report Share Posted April 11, 2005 You will not be able to trail ride with those cylinders, as stated in about 20 other topics about the cheetah cubs. They are a set of racing cylinders, if you do not race, then I would not invest in them. You'd be better off getting a good port job that suits your trail riding style Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locogato11283 Posted April 11, 2005 Report Share Posted April 11, 2005 You will not be able to trail ride with those cylinders, as stated in about 20 other topics about the cheetah cubs. They are a set of racing cylinders, if you do not race, then I would not invest in them. You'd be better off getting a good port job that suits your trail riding style 353431[/snapback] agreed. try doing a search on cheetah cub or just cub. plenty of other threads about this prolly no more than half a page down in the repairs forum... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDD Posted April 12, 2005 Report Share Posted April 12, 2005 agreed. try doing a search on cheetah cub or just cub. plenty of other threads about this prolly no more than half a page down in the repairs forum... 353459[/snapback] Care to tell the rest of us HQ members exactly what makes up a good trail motor? Please be as specific as possible and include port timing numbers. You have posted in just about every thread about Cubs that they are drag/race motors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1800bigk Posted April 12, 2005 Report Share Posted April 12, 2005 (edited) get the 68mm bore with 58mm stroke, keep the factory port job and it will have more than enough low end for trail riding. Edited April 12, 2005 by 1800bigk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locogato11283 Posted April 12, 2005 Report Share Posted April 12, 2005 Care to tell the rest of us HQ members exactly what makes up a good trail motor? Please be as specific as possible and include port timing numbers. You have posted in just about every thread about Cubs that they are drag/race motors. 353703[/snapback] sure ill explain. i know that my engine comes on around 6000rpms or so. i have ridden 01bansheeke's bike with the cub cylinders and the power felt exactly the same as my engine. this type of power is not what i would consider a trail rideable motor. maybe you like to run the trails with a motor like that but i dont. i would rather run something that has power that comes on around 4000rpm or so. i dont know port timing numbers or any of that fancy talk but i do know seat of the pants riding, and from my experience with the cubs i dont believe they would be a good trail rideable motor. i feel that they will be much more at home in the dunes and dragging. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
01bansheeke Posted April 12, 2005 Report Share Posted April 12, 2005 sure ill explain. i know that my engine comes on around 6000rpms or so. i have ridden 01bansheeke's bike with the cub cylinders and the power felt exactly the same as my engine. this type of power is not what i would consider a trail rideable motor. maybe you like to run the trails with a motor like that but i dont. i would rather run something that has power that comes on around 4000rpm or so. i dont know port timing numbers or any of that fancy talk but i do know seat of the pants riding, and from my experience with the cubs i dont believe they would be a good trail rideable motor. i feel that they will be much more at home in the dunes and dragging. 353754[/snapback] this is not a trail bike. You would have to be a bad ass with the clutch to even ride this thing on the regular on the trails. You probably still won't be that fast. the torque just isnt' there. you CAN ride it on the trails, but once again, you won't be as fast as a torquey bike with good suspension. CHEETAH CUBS are staight up top end motors without the powervalves. good luck being fast elsewhere Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noob41 Posted April 12, 2005 Report Share Posted April 12, 2005 sure ill explain. i know that my engine comes on around 6000rpms or so. i have ridden 01bansheeke's bike with the cub cylinders and the power felt exactly the same as my engine. this type of power is not what i would consider a trail rideable motor. maybe you like to run the trails with a motor like that but i dont. i would rather run something that has power that comes on around 4000rpm or so. i dont know port timing numbers or any of that fancy talk but i do know seat of the pants riding, and from my experience with the cubs i dont believe they would be a good trail rideable motor. i feel that they will be much more at home in the dunes and dragging. 353754[/snapback] you are going to have a hard time finding a stock cylinder banshee engine that comes on at 4000 rpm. even the best trail port will only make 25 - 28 hp at best @ 4k. The cubs make 30 something just right past idle. If you have a dyno sheet of a banshee engine making lots of low end power please post it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDD Posted April 12, 2005 Report Share Posted April 12, 2005 sure ill explain. i know that my engine comes on around 6000rpms or so. i have ridden 01bansheeke's bike with the cub cylinders and the power felt exactly the same as my engine. this type of power is not what i would consider a trail rideable motor. maybe you like to run the trails with a motor like that but i dont. i would rather run something that has power that comes on around 4000rpm or so. i dont know port timing numbers or any of that fancy talk but i do know seat of the pants riding, and from my experience with the cubs i dont believe they would be a good trail rideable motor. i feel that they will be much more at home in the dunes and dragging. 353754[/snapback] Where do the stock motors with stock pipes come into the band? Show me a dyno curve that comes onto the pipe at 4k rpms. You may not like a Banshee that comes on at 6k rpms but who says everyone doesn't? What makes up trail riding anyway? Your trail riding might be through trees that you can barely squeeze a quad through. Others maybe talking about desert trails with lots of wash roads to blast down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locogato11283 Posted April 12, 2005 Report Share Posted April 12, 2005 you are going to have a hard time finding a stock cylinder banshee engine that comes on at 4000 rpm. even the best trail port will only make 25 - 28 hp at best @ 4k. The cubs make 30 something just right past idle. If you have a dyno sheet of a banshee engine making lots of low end power please post it. 353766[/snapback] my bro has a dyno sheet but its so damn shitty its not worth posting. it was from his stock stroke eric gorr woods port motor. power came on right around 4000rpm. that motor had tons of low end. i dont care about hp numbers and whatever else. im telling you from experience between the two that a woods port motor will be much faster in the trails than these cubs. you dont have to believe me but i have ridden both and i know what motor id choose in the woods, even if it only made 55 hp. you guys dont have to agree with me, go ahead and run them in the trails. doesnt bother me any. im just tryin to let some ppl know from my experience with them. most ppl will find someone's opinion between the 2 much more valuable than dyno sheets and port specs.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noob41 Posted April 12, 2005 Report Share Posted April 12, 2005 (edited) this is not a trail bike. You would have to be a bad ass with the clutch to even ride this thing on the regular on the trails. You probably still won't be that fast. Edited April 12, 2005 by noob41 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
01bansheeke Posted April 12, 2005 Report Share Posted April 12, 2005 where we come from, trails are in the tree's, not a wide open wash at glamis or baja. banshee's just aren't the best trail bikes no matter what you do, but they can be built to be better trail bikes. powervalves are bottom line, the way to go if you want A LOT of power all over. These once again, do not have powervalves, the motor does not come on at the same time the cheetah powervalve motors do. all in what your opinion is. if you ride this motor in the trails, i will eat you alive on a stock 450..all day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locogato11283 Posted April 12, 2005 Report Share Posted April 12, 2005 what was your main jet and pilot jet, a 421cc two stroke will have gobs of low end when properly jetted. If your main was anything bigger than 152 then you are way down on power. If your pilot was bigger than 48 than you are missing out on all the low end fun. you should be able to keep it a gear high and still pull right out with no clutch feathering at all. 353771[/snapback] dude what are you talking about? you cant just throw a 152 in and be done cuz u think itll make the most power there, thats a good way to burn something up. i run 35mm pwk and my main is a 162. thats been properly jetted on a dyno. pilot is a 45. i jet so that my shit will run right, dont know about you. maybe aorund there you can get away with a 152 main, but here youll be buying a new top end... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDD Posted April 12, 2005 Report Share Posted April 12, 2005 my bro has a dyno sheet but its so damn shitty its not worth posting. it was from his stock stroke eric gorr woods port motor. power came on right around 4000rpm. that motor had tons of low end. i dont care about hp numbers and whatever else. im telling you from experience between the two that a woods port motor will be much faster in the trails than these cubs. you dont have to believe me but i have ridden both and i know what motor id choose in the woods, even if it only made 55 hp. you guys dont have to agree with me, go ahead and run them in the trails. doesnt bother me any. im just tryin to let some ppl know from my experience with them. most ppl will find someone's opinion between the 2 much more valuable than dyno sheets and port specs.. 353770[/snapback] I know your brother had a crappy dyno sheet thats not easy to make out. No one should care about HP numbers... everyone has HP as being the most important thing when it's actually the torque that is doing the work. Would you say a bike with 45#'s of torque with a 1000rpm width at 5k rpms would be more rideable than a bike with 45#'s at 7k-10k rpms for a 3k wide powerband? Basically what I'm saying is what matters the most in making a rideable machine is how wide the torque curve is and how much over rev the bike will have. From the sounds of it you were drag racing on 01bansheeke's bike. That short amount of time on any unfamiliar bike isn't enough time to give an honest opinion. If you rode a Blaster for 6 months what do you think your opinion of a Banshee would be after a few mins of riding? I know I would be impressed with the power but complain how much you have to shift. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDD Posted April 12, 2005 Report Share Posted April 12, 2005 where we come from, trails are in the tree's, not a wide open wash at glamis or baja. banshee's just aren't the best trail bikes no matter what you do, but they can be built to be better trail bikes. powervalves are bottom line, the way to go if you want A LOT of power all over. These once again, do not have powervalves, the motor does not come on at the same time the cheetah powervalve motors do. all in what your opinion is. if you ride this motor in the trails, i will eat you alive on a stock 450..all day. 353773[/snapback] Does everyone ride in the trees? Powervalves allow a cylinder to have more extreme exhaust port timing with the valve up yet still have a decent/lowend port timing wise when the valve is down. I know 1800bigK's Full Cheetah doesn't have the powervalves in it and he says the motor has more torque than a YFZ. I don't know if this is true or not but it really doesn't matter anyway. The nice thing about the cub is you can get it in a larger bore size (68mm) in the stock stroke length. This along with higher compression domes will be plenty torquey if you set it up to be. It all depends on your whole engine setup... the port timing plays a part on engine character but so does the pipe, carb, compression, timing, and a bunch of other minor things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.